Tag(s): tr-encoding

Posts

The Encoding Candidate Recommendation has been updated to take into account changes made to the editor’s draft since its previous publication as a Candidate Recommendation. These changes are largely due to issues discovered during implementation.

This is a snapshot of the WHATWG document, as of 10 November 2016, and if you wish to make comments regarding this document, please raise them as github issues against the WhatWG version of the spec. Only send comments by email to www-international@w3.org if you are unable to raise issues on github. All comments are welcome.

The utf-8 encoding is the most appropriate encoding for interchange of Unicode, the universal coded character set. Therefore for new protocols and formats, as well as existing formats deployed in new contexts, this specification requires (and defines) the utf-8 encoding.

The other (legacy) encodings have been defined to some extent in the past. However, user agents have not always implemented them in the same way, have not always used the same labels, and often differ in dealing with undefined and former proprietary areas of encodings. This specification addresses those gaps so that new user agents do not have to reverse engineer encoding implementations and existing user agents can converge.

The Encoding Candidate Recommendation has been updated to take into account changes made to the editor’s draft since its initial publication as a Candidate Recommendation. These changes are largely due to issues discovered during implementation. This is a snapshot of the WHATWG document, as of 29 September 2015 and no changes have been made from the original in the body of the document other than to align with W3C house styles.

If you wish to make comments regarding this document, please raise them as github issues against the latest editor’s draft. Only send comments by email to www-international@w3.org if you are unable to raise issues on github. All comments are welcome.

The utf-8 encoding is the most appropriate encoding for interchange of Unicode, the universal coded character set. Therefore for new protocols and formats, as well as existing formats deployed in new contexts, this specification requires (and defines) the utf-8 encoding.

The other (legacy) encodings have been defined to some extent in the past. However, user agents have not always implemented them in the same way, have not always used the same labels, and often differ in dealing with undefined and former proprietary areas of encodings. This specification addresses those gaps so that new user agents do not have to reverse engineer encoding implementations and existing user agents can converge.

The Encoding specification has been published as a Candidate Recommendation. This is a snapshot of the WHATWG document, as of 4 September 2014, published after discussion with the WHATWG editors. No changes have been made in the body of this document other than to align with W3C house styles. The primary reason that W3C is publishing this document is so that HTML5 and other specifications may normatively refer to a stable W3C Recommendation.

Going forward, the Internationalization Working Group expects to receive more comments in the form of implementation feedback and test cases. The Working Group
believes it will have satisfied its implementation criteria no earlier than 16 March 2015. If you would like to contribute test cases or information about implementations, please send mail to www-international@w3.org.

The utf-8 encoding is the most appropriate encoding for interchange of Unicode, the universal coded character set. Therefore for new protocols and formats, as well as existing formats deployed in new contexts, this specification requires (and defines) the utf-8 encoding.

The other (legacy) encodings have been defined to some extent in the past. However, user agents have not always implemented them in the same way, have not always used the same labels, and often differ in dealing with undefined and former proprietary areas of encodings. This specification addresses those gaps so that new user agents do not have to reverse engineer encoding implementations and existing user agents can converge.

While encodings have been defined to some extent, implementations have not always implemented them in the same way, have not always used the same labels, and often differ in dealing with undefined and former proprietary areas of encodings. This specification attempts to fill those gaps so that new implementations do not have to reverse engineer encoding implementations of the market leaders and existing implementations can converge.

The body of this spec is an exact copy of the WHATWG version as of the date of its publication, intended to provide a stable reference for other specifications. We are hoping for people to review the specification and send comments about any technical areas that need attention (see the Status section for details).

The Internationalization Working Group has published a First Public Working Draft of Encoding.

While encodings have been defined to some extent, implementations have not always implemented them in the same way, have not always used the same labels, and often differ in dealing with undefined and former proprietary areas of encodings. This specification attempts to fill those gaps so that new implementations do not have to reverse engineer encoding implementations of the market leaders and existing implementations can converge.

This is a snapshot of the Encoding Living Standard, as of the date shown on the title page. No changes have been made in the body of the W3C draft other than to align with W3C house styles. The primary reason that W3C is publishing this document is so that HTML5 and other specifications may normatively refer to a stable W3C Recommendation.